The company is in better shape financially now than just about any time in it's history. If you are gunna do something this dramatic then right now is the best time. The Ipod (and derivi will float the company for at least another year.
They could go with a pretty general PC design...the current PowerPC designs are basically the same as Intel boxes except with PowerPC chips.
BUT....they could keep windows off of these systems (and LINUX..) by having a propriatary BIOS like apple does now and that would effectively keep windows off it.
Would it be possible to create a system with BOTH chips in it?
The thought just popped into my head...and it's probably insane but could you make a dual processor system with two different types? Would/Could there be any advantage to doing so?
What is this pre-occupation with "that product has bigger market share than x product".
As long as UNIX/LINUX/Whatever/Windows does the job you need it to do it will be around. If it does it well and it's cost effective then more people will use it. If not then less people will use it.
One thing is certain. LINUX/BSD will be around as long as there are uses for it and people continue to develop it and develop for it. This is different from commercial OS's that can die when their companies screw up. So I say WHO CARES! Use what works and ignore the hype.
I recently did a sleep study and I was borderline narcoleptic. Basically they make you seep for 45 min then stay up for 2 hours 5 times in a row and then watch how fast you fall into rem sleep on each period. Narcoleptics will fall into REM almost immidiately. For me...that happened 3 out of 5 times...4 or 5 being the definitive diagnosis. I often get sleepy in the afternoon.
I had read there could be some small interactions with CONCERTA which I already take.
But...as with all meds people should talk to a doctor before taking serious meds.
Looks like I might have to ask my doc about this stuff.
- New header format (less overhead in routers) - A new Efficient and hierarchical addressing and routing infrastructure (again....less overhead in routers) - Stateless and stateful address configuration (You could theoretically dump your DHCP servers) - Built in IPsec - Better support for QOS (Quality of service) in the protocol fields - It's extensible (more headers can be added..it's in the protocol)
Let's face it...Windows keeps us employed. If computers were easy to use and did'nt crash that much we'd all be in MUCH less demand.
My passion is for Microsoft to continue to design windows exactly the way it's been doing for the last 20 years. I've probably made over a million dollars in salary "fixing" windows problems and applications so my passion is pretty high to keep windows right on the same track it's on.
In the Movie "The Fly" the premace of the transportation device is that you are incinerated in one pod and duplicated in another.
Jeff Goldbloom gets out of the second pod and looks at the monkey and says "Is is real? Or is it memorex" (slogan from the 80's about Memorex's audio tapes...for those of you too young to remember)
Factoring out spiritual/religious questions, a friend once asked me a question concerning if the copy was the "real" you. He said "If it looks like you, talks like you and acts the way you would act and nobody can tell the difference...does it matter?"
You would'nt have to distribute the torrent file. A one liner with a Magnet URI address of a torrent swarm managed by the distributed hash schemes networks now in use would be all you would need in the Usenet post.
In fact, I'm rather surprised since the latest version of Azureus supports it (and it's easy to find out what the URI address is of the torrent you are part of..there is an option to copy it to your clipboard in Azureus) that I have'nt seen Magnet URI addresses on websites on web sites to hosting torrent files. It would definitely cut back on the bandwidth a site would have manage.
I agree..Magnet links are the way to go. But..just on my cursory research many people don't understand manget URI's or how they are to be used. Every time I make the suggestion for sites to list magnet links instead of links to torrent files (or in addition to) the responses make it clear that people are clueless as to what magnet links are....in addition to the new distributed hash table networks that have trackerless torrents.
Magnet links will work eventually, heck once they start getting published you'll be able to get them off of google (I've managed lately to get into torrents from torrent files that were cached in google and then was able to join a torrent with no tracker but was using the distributed hash network).
Fact of the matter is, with most OS's the most important factor for reponsiveness on the desktop happen to be a decent amount of memory and a fast low latency disk.
Take a PII 233 with at least a gig of ram and a modern IDE drive + UDMA 100/133 controller and your normal apps like web browsers and such work just fine.
Don't go expecting to do serious gaming on it or something computationally intensive, but for regular stuff it will surprise you how much faster a memory upgrade and a new hard drive can boost an "obsolete" system.
At SC2004, ResearchChannel, Intel, AJA Video Systems and the University of Washington demonstrated two-way, uncompressed, high-definition (HD) 1080i videoconferencing running at 1.5 gbps in each direction between Canberra, Australia, Seattle and Pittsburgh.
This unprecedented high-quality, low-latency interactive videoconferencing transited AARNet, University of Hawaii, Pacific Wave, Pacific Northwest Gigapop and National LambdaRail (NLR) 10 gigabit wavelength.
The technology was developed by Jim DeRoest (Director, Streaming Media), Michael Wellings (Director, Engineering) and Matt Hodge (Software Engineer) and demonstrated a previously unattainable level of reliable data traffic between two WindowsXP platform computers. The total bi-directional data-rate reached 3 gigabits per second.
A couple of years back I got to talk to some researchers doing work in the area of high def video conferencing. The thing is, hi-def is more than just high bandwidth. Psychologically speaking there is evidence that when a video conference gets to the quality where it looks like you are talking to someone through a hole in a wall or a real window vs a screen the interaction becomes more like a 1 to 1 real life meeting.
The easiest analogy to think of is when we watch a movie...even though we KNOW we are watching a movie but because of the content get sucked in and forget that it's not real (subconciously that is).
Its not perfect, but you probably get the idea. Life like high def video conferencing is definitly worth the time and effort!
Read last section I've bolded below from the GPL....it would be rather difficult for MS to do...
---
. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change. b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run, you must cause it, when started running for such interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on the Program is not required to print an announcement.) These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
If they did...what exactly would they be getting? a Duplicate company called...say "Blue hat" could pop up in a couple of weeks with a duplicate copy of everything Redhat sells (besides the copyrighted red fedora) and start selling copies just like before.
Redhat's profits are primarily from service contracts and their automated patch udpates.
Remeber...everything is GPL'd...so buying out Redhat would at most just give MS some time (against Redhat ONLY)....there ARE other LINUX distros out there....like Mandrake...SuSE.....MEPIS...debian......
I wonder how many people worldwide would watch an ad infused MPEG-4 mutlicasted version at 2Mb/s vs just download it?
Heck, if ANY major broadcaster wanted to reach just about every college campus in the world all they would have to do is set up on Internet2 and multicast the stream. Internet2 is multicast enabled and peers with all the other major research/university/college ineternet networks that are ALSO multicast enabled.
Slashdot Mirror
The company is in better shape financially now than just about any time in it's history. If you are gunna do something this dramatic then right now is the best time. The Ipod (and derivi will float the company for at least another year.
They could go with a pretty general PC design...the current PowerPC designs are basically the same as Intel boxes except with PowerPC chips.
BUT....they could keep windows off of these systems (and LINUX..) by having a propriatary BIOS like apple does now and that would effectively keep windows off it.
Would it be possible to create a system with BOTH chips in it?
The thought just popped into my head...and it's probably insane but could you make a dual processor system with two different types? Would/Could there be any advantage to doing so?
And for those who don't even want to download the torrent file to join the swarm....
6 DJ WQ
Here is the Azureus Magnet URI...
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:F57RHAID47YKCYTWAHON3ATMRQY
Well then...I'll be sure when going to Europe to pack the right guide...just in case
0 049628/qid=1117706602/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/102-6130 001-2949707?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/140
What is this pre-occupation with "that product has bigger market share than x product".
As long as UNIX/LINUX/Whatever/Windows does the job you need it to do it will be around. If it does it well and it's cost effective then more people will use it. If not then less people will use it.
One thing is certain. LINUX/BSD will be around as long as there are uses for it and people continue to develop it and develop for it. This is different from commercial OS's that can die when their companies screw up. So I say WHO CARES! Use what works and ignore the hype.
The Commodore 64 had it's OS in ROM and millions were sold to consumers.
Thanks for the info.....
I recently did a sleep study and I was borderline narcoleptic. Basically they make you seep for 45 min then stay up for 2 hours 5 times in a row and then watch how fast you fall into rem sleep on each period. Narcoleptics will fall into REM almost immidiately. For me...that happened 3 out of 5 times...4 or 5 being the definitive diagnosis. I often get sleepy in the afternoon.
I had read there could be some small interactions with CONCERTA which I already take.
But...as with all meds people should talk to a doctor before taking serious meds.
Looks like I might have to ask my doc about this stuff.
Does anybody take this and can coroborate the claims of the article?
If this stuff really works I'd be concerned about long term side effects.
Other than larger address space?
- New header format (less overhead in routers)
- A new Efficient and hierarchical addressing and routing infrastructure (again....less overhead in routers)
- Stateless and stateful address configuration (You could theoretically dump your DHCP servers)
- Built in IPsec
- Better support for QOS (Quality of service) in the protocol fields
- It's extensible (more headers can be added..it's in the protocol)
and more...
If people wanted to jump start IPv6 traffic (at least on Internet2), an offical Bittorrent protocol specification that includes IPv6 would help.
Bram Cohen has talked on occasion about IPv6 having some advantages for Bittorrent although I can't remember what he said.
Let's face it...Windows keeps us employed. If computers were easy to use and did'nt crash that much we'd all be in MUCH less demand.
My passion is for Microsoft to continue to design windows exactly the way it's been doing for the last 20 years. I've probably made over a million dollars in salary "fixing" windows problems and applications so my passion is pretty high to keep windows right on the same track it's on.
ASCII Flat files are the way to go. If I can't fgrep it...then to hell with it. SQL my ass..
Oh agree with you...but from a purely technical perspective of posting pointers on Usenet Magnet would probably work better.
In the Movie "The Fly" the premace of the transportation device is that you are incinerated in one pod and duplicated in another.
Jeff Goldbloom gets out of the second pod and looks at the monkey and says "Is is real? Or is it memorex" (slogan from the 80's about Memorex's audio tapes...for those of you too young to remember)
Factoring out spiritual/religious questions, a friend once asked me a question concerning if the copy was the "real" you. He said "If it looks like you, talks like you and acts the way you would act and nobody can tell the difference...does it matter?"
Actually.....
You would'nt have to distribute the torrent file. A one liner with a Magnet URI address of a torrent swarm managed by the distributed hash schemes networks now in use would be all you would need in the Usenet post.
In fact, I'm rather surprised since the latest version of Azureus supports it (and it's easy to find out what the URI address is of the torrent you are part of..there is an option to copy it to your clipboard in Azureus) that I have'nt seen Magnet URI addresses on websites on web sites to hosting torrent files. It would definitely cut back on the bandwidth a site would have manage.
I agree..Magnet links are the way to go. But..just on my cursory research many people don't understand manget URI's or how they are to be used. Every time I make the suggestion for sites to list magnet links instead of links to torrent files (or in addition to) the responses make it clear that people are clueless as to what magnet links are....in addition to the new distributed hash table networks that have trackerless torrents.
Magnet links will work eventually, heck once they start getting published you'll be able to get them off of google (I've managed lately to get into torrents from torrent files that were cached in google and then was able to join a torrent with no tracker but was using the distributed hash network).
Fact of the matter is, with most OS's the most important factor for reponsiveness on the desktop happen to be a decent amount of memory and a fast low latency disk.
Take a PII 233 with at least a gig of ram and a modern IDE drive + UDMA 100/133 controller and your normal apps like web browsers and such work just fine.
Don't go expecting to do serious gaming on it or something computationally intensive, but for regular stuff it will surprise you how much faster a memory upgrade and a new hard drive can boost an "obsolete" system.
from researchchannel.org...
At SC2004, ResearchChannel, Intel, AJA Video Systems and the University of Washington demonstrated two-way, uncompressed, high-definition (HD) 1080i videoconferencing running at 1.5 gbps in each direction between Canberra, Australia, Seattle and Pittsburgh.
This unprecedented high-quality, low-latency interactive videoconferencing transited AARNet, University of Hawaii, Pacific Wave, Pacific Northwest Gigapop and National LambdaRail (NLR) 10 gigabit wavelength.
The technology was developed by Jim DeRoest (Director, Streaming Media), Michael Wellings (Director, Engineering) and Matt Hodge (Software Engineer) and demonstrated a previously unattainable level of reliable data traffic between two WindowsXP platform computers. The total bi-directional data-rate reached 3 gigabits per second.
The majority of those problems have to do with mis-configured/badly designed network infrastructure.
All it takes is for one switch in a routing path to drop UDP packets to cause frame rate loss and or sound loss.
Internet2 does experimentation in High-Def video conferencing...and we still have network issues
A couple of years back I got to talk to some researchers doing work in the area of high def video conferencing. The thing is, hi-def is more than just high bandwidth. Psychologically speaking there is evidence that when a video conference gets to the quality where it looks like you are talking to someone through a hole in a wall or a real window vs a screen the interaction becomes more like a 1 to 1 real life meeting.
The easiest analogy to think of is when we watch a movie...even though we KNOW we are watching a movie but because of the content get sucked in and forget that it's not real (subconciously that is).
Its not perfect, but you probably get the idea. Life like high def video conferencing is definitly worth the time and effort!
Read last section I've bolded below from the GPL....it would be rather difficult for MS to do...
---
. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.
c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run, you must cause it, when started running for such interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on the Program is not required to print an announcement.)
These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
If they did...what exactly would they be getting? a Duplicate company called...say "Blue hat" could pop up in a couple of weeks with a duplicate copy of everything Redhat sells (besides the copyrighted red fedora) and start selling copies just like before.
Redhat's profits are primarily from service contracts and their automated patch udpates.
Remeber...everything is GPL'd...so buying out Redhat would at most just give MS some time (against Redhat ONLY)....there ARE other LINUX distros out there....like Mandrake...SuSE.....MEPIS...debian......
I wonder how many people worldwide would watch an ad infused MPEG-4 mutlicasted version at 2Mb/s vs just download it?
Heck, if ANY major broadcaster wanted to reach just about every college campus in the world all they would have to do is set up on Internet2 and multicast the stream. Internet2 is multicast enabled and peers with all the other major research/university/college ineternet networks that are ALSO multicast enabled.
What if you don't make them links, just plain text you would have to copy and paste?
I'm not sure it got shut down...but they caved under threat and settled.